Snip

Dr. Sunic was born in Communist Yugoslavia, where political discourse was heavily regulated to inoculate those in power in that country from scrutiny. The rampant state-repression had ramifications for his family, as he recounts in an op-ed in the Occidental Observer:

In 1984 my father, Mirko Sunic, a former Catholic lawyer and my sister, Mirna Sunic, a professor, were sentenced to 4 years and 10 months of prison respectively, pursuant to Article 133 of the Criminal Code of communist Yugoslavia — a law that criminalized “hostile propaganda.” The charges had been filed by the state communist attorney Ante Nobilo. Subsequently, Mirko Sunic was adopted by Amnesty International and 15 US Congressmen as a prisoner of conscience. At the same time, I was granted political asylum while living in the United States.

Sunic, upon arriving at the centre of the putative “free world”, the United States, was surprised to discover that much of the political correctness that existed in Communist Yugoslavia also existed—albeit more subtly—in the capitalist West. This communistic regulation of thought in the West partially stems from the fact that countries like the United States, Britain, Canada and Australia fought on the same side as the Communists in World War II in order to thwart the most strident bulwarks of anti-Communism in Europe and Asia, namely Germany, Italy and Japan. All those Allied nations, be they Communist or non-Communist, had a vested interest in making a certain set of assumptions about Jews, Fascists, Germans, Soviets, etc, sacrosanct, lest their citizens and subjects countenance the possibility that their parents and grandparents died in vain in a needless war.

Sunic observed that just as one could lose one’s job and even be criminalized, if labelled “fascistic” or “anti-Semitic” in the Communist East, the same was true in the “democratic” West.
03_Tomislav_SunicDr. Tomislav Sunic

Sunic—who speaks French, German, English impeccably—has dedicated much intellectual labour to drawing attention to the absurd thought-crime legislation which has been enacted in Western nations under the guise of combatting “hate speech” and historical revisionism.

In France, for example, one can be criminalized merely for questioning the verdicts of the Nuremberg trials. The French State’s attempt to regulate History appears particularly foolish when one considers that Article 19 of the Nuremberg Charter stated unabashedly that:

The Tribunal shall not be bound by technical rules of evidence. It shall adopt and apply to the greatest possible extent expeditious and nontechnical procedure, and shall admit any evidence which it deems to be of probative value.

In the interview I asked Dr. Sunic to comment on Canada’s anti-free-speech laws. Reflecting upon what his father would say if he was alive today, Dr. Sunic opined: